Trump, backers ask courts to halt or block 3 state recounts

[MikeLikesU]

Anyways...all water under the bridge.

Jill just backed out of Pennsylvania.

 

I was hoping we could watch another Hillary Ship Sink....in the recount.

but, alas.

 

[harrry]

I think the Director of Homeland Security is a political appointment as is the Director of National Security.  I understand they will be out of a job very soon.

Like him or not Trump is the next President.  People can ask him not to talk to Taiwan but it is up to him if he does.  I for one think it is about time someone did much as I may prefer it not to be him.

Edited December 4, 2016 by harrry

[MikeLikesU]

7 minutes ago, harrry said:

I think the Director of Homeland Security is a political appointment as is the Director of National Security.  I understand they will be out of a job very soon.

Like him or not Trump is the next President.  People can ask him not to talk to Taiwan but it is up to him if he does.  I for one think it is about time someone did much as I may prefer it not to be him.

 

Nixon broke ranks, and started talking to China...pretty much on his own.  Even continued his endeavors, after his "resignation".

 

Always room for a Mustang....who can buck the rules and norms.

 

 

 

Edited December 4, 2016 by MikeLikesU

[OMGImInPattaya]

There are substantial legal issues of whether Jill Stein even has standing to request recounts in that she has no realistic chance of winning them after said recount...and the voters of the states in question would suffer substantial harm if the recounts (with no hope of a Stein victory) interfered with the electors of these states casting their votes in the electoral college. It's my guess that the recounts will in fact be blocked by the courts because of the serious legal and electoral issues raised by those suing to block the recounts.

[Si Thea01]

17 hours ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

This is Trump warming them up to his business proposal and also an early conflict of interest likely to see him impeached and replaced by Pence before he even gets started.

http://shanghaiist.com/2016/11/18/trump_taiwan_expand.php

 

 

You wish.  It's gone from he'll never win, he's a womaniser, a sexual predator, a bigot and racist, a divider. Bloody hell, none of that worked,  he's won so let's look for another way.  OMG, HRC won the popular vote, nope, that won't work but let's keep banging on with that and see what'll will happen, nope not good enough.  Gee what else can we come up with, I know, let the press keep going at him, oh no, he's now calling them dishonest and the voters believe him. We just can't win, we even lost the election.

 

Come on, there must be something else.  Hey, let's recount the votes of the blue states he flipped, bring in the Russian conspiracy, no, not good enough how about hoping for a conflict of interest and impeachment.  Yeah, let's run with that but if it doesn't work, then we can look for something else to try and get rid of him before he has started.

 

Wow, look at this, it's a certainty, he's associating with the Philippine's President, got a phone call from the Taiwan prime minister and poor little China has run off complaining to the current POTUS.  Heck, he doesn't seem to care either but don't worry, it might work,  no wait, the voters think it is great that he is looking to bring other nations into the fore.  Bloody hell why can't we find something to being him unstuck before he's started? 

 

Obviously some haven't been keeping up to date, he's already started and isn't even inaugurated yet.  And replaced by Pence, gee what will one come up with to discredit him even though we know what we are propagating would be false, just as is the rest of spin we're flogging about the President-Elect.  No wonder the country is divided. 

[Shawn0000]

37 minutes ago, Si Thea01 said:

 

 

You wish.  It's gone from he'll never win, he's a womaniser, a sexual predator, a bigot and racist, a divider. Bloody hell, none of that worked,  he's won so let's look for another way.  OMG, HRC won the popular vote, nope, that won't work but let's keep banging on with that and see what'll will happen, nope not good enough.  Gee what else can we come up with, I know, let the press keep going at him, oh no, he's now calling them dishonest and the voters believe him. We just can't win, we even lost the election.

 

Come on, there must be something else.  Hey, let's recount the votes of the blue states he flipped, bring in the Russian conspiracy, no, not good enough how about hoping for a conflict of interest and impeachment.  Yeah, let's run with that but if it doesn't work, then we can look for something else to try and get rid of him before he has started.

 

Wow, look at this, it's a certainty, he's associating with the Philippine's President, got a phone call from the Taiwan prime minister and poor little China has run off complaining to the current POTUS.  Heck, he doesn't seem to care either but don't worry, it might work,  no wait, the voters think it is great that he is looking to bring other nations into the fore.  Bloody hell why can't we find something to being him unstuck before he's started? 

 

Obviously some haven't been keeping up to date, he's already started and isn't even inaugurated yet.  And replaced by Pence, gee what will one come up with to discredit him even though we know what we are propagating would be false, just as is the rest of spin we're flogging about the President-Elect.  No wonder the country is divided. 

 

No sooner had he selected his Filipino ambassador did he get the go ahead for the hotel he has been wanting to build but was put off due to planning constraints, now he is talking to Taiwan right before his son flies out to make the deal on the Hotel there.  His son was on a flight recently and when asked about the introduction of Muslim identification he replied, "we, are not going to do that", yes that is right, Trump Jnr said WE.  The children who are going to be running the business so as to avoid Trump being impeached for conflict of interest appear to believe they are involved also in the politics.

 

Anyway, got a problem with your beloved being scrutinized?  And why would that be exactly?

[Shawn0000]

53 minutes ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

There are substantial legal issues of whether Jill Stein even has standing to request recounts in that she has no realistic chance of winning them after said recount...and the voters of the states in question would suffer substantial harm if the recounts (with no hope of a Stein victory) interfered with the electors of these states casting their votes in the electoral college. It's my guess that the recounts will in fact be blocked by the courts because of the serious legal and electoral issues raised by those suing to block the recounts.

 

No, there are not, anyone who stood can request a recount.

[Shawn0000]

1 hour ago, harrry said:

I think the Director of Homeland Security is a political appointment as is the Director of National Security.  I understand they will be out of a job very soon.

Like him or not Trump is the next President.  People can ask him not to talk to Taiwan but it is up to him if he does.  I for one think it is about time someone did much as I may prefer it not to be him.

 

Oh, he has been asked now, no wait, told!  That is half the problem with Trump, he has exactly no idea of the implications of his actions, he had no idea they were not speaking with Taiwan on the request of China, he just wanted to thank them for their message as he is planning to expand his business there very soon.

[lannarebirth]

3 hours ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

If they prove that there was fraud from abroad would it really be a waste of time?  Funny that some are so desperate to win that they are willing to overlook the suspicion that Russia may have infiltrated the system!

 

Russia apparently did infiltrate the system. The email system of the DNC and the Clinton campaign, where they appear to show evidence of a conspiracy to undermine a competitors candidacy and other assorted "dirty tricks". Apparently the voting public found the findings of Russian hackers to be more credible than the DNC or Hillary Clinton. Now that's a flawed candidate. Still, many people supported her.

Edited December 4, 2016 by lannarebirth

[Dagnabbit]

Wait, why would they do that, after all they have nothing to fear, why it was a landslide victory, oh wait it wasn't? Well maybe they will find those 3 million illegal aliens that voted. Surely they aren't worried about something, after all if you do no wrong you have nothing to fear, right.
 
In 6 months time there won't be much left to say as the country will be well on it's way to bankruptcy and the fascist on his way to making billions out of the oval office.

Because this is not about the recount but about the delay.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Si Thea01]

2 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

No sooner had he selected his Filipino ambassador did he get the go ahead for the hotel he has been wanting to build but was put off due to planning constraints, now he is talking to Taiwan right before his son flies out to make the deal on the Hotel there.  His son was on a flight recently and when asked about the introduction of Muslim identification he replied, "we, are not going to do that", yes that is right, Trump Jnr said WE.  The children who are going to be running the business so as to avoid Trump being impeached for conflict of interest appear to believe they are involved also in the politics.

 

Anyway, got a problem with your beloved being scrutinized?  And why would that be exactly?

 

Where did I say or even intimate that I have a problem with him being scrutinised?  See how you make things up.  People can scrutinize him as much as they like, as long as it is fair, factual and not concocted to satisfy certain types or agendas. It has no effect on me whatsoever and if you and anyone else want to do so, then go for it.

 

Once he is sworn in as POTUS, and does something that is not within keeping of the office, it is factual and not hearsay or innuendo, then I will be one of the first to criticise but neither what I or you have to say will ever have any bearing on his position.  You really should learn to live with it but it is obvious you can't.  And as you say, why would that be exactly?

 

   

[Shawn0000]

21 minutes ago, lannarebirth said:

 

Russia apparently did infiltrate the system. The email system of the DNC and the Clinton campaign, where they appear to show evidence of a conspiracy to undermine a competitors candidacy and other assorted "dirty tricks". Apparently the voting public found the findings of Russian hackers to be more credible than the DNC or Hillary Clinton. Now that's a flawed candidate. Still, many people supported her.

 

People were rightly worried of Trumps desire to dismantle NATO for Russia, he has some rather larger flaws, at least to anyone who can think beyond their delight at hearing a presidential candidate use rhetoric akin to the KKK.

[Shawn0000]

11 minutes ago, Si Thea01 said:

 

Where did I say or even intimate that I have a problem with him being scrutinised?  See how you make things up.  People can scrutinize him as much as they like, as long as it is fair, factual and not concocted to satisfy certain types or agendas. It has no effect on me whatsoever and if you and anyone else want to do so, then go for it.

 

Once he is sworn in as POTUS, and does something that is not within keeping of the office, it is factual and not hearsay or innuendo, then I will be one of the first to criticise but neither what I or you have to say will ever have any bearing on his position.  You really should learn to live with it but it is obvious you can't.  And as you say, why would that be exactly?

 

   

 

Oh, it is a little something called democracy, no one in a democracy has to "learn to live with it" they are all entitled to fight against politics they do not like.

[Shawn0000]

13 minutes ago, Si Thea01 said:

 

Where did I say or even intimate that I have a problem with him being scrutinised?  See how you make things up.  People can scrutinize him as much as they like, as long as it is fair, factual and not concocted to satisfy certain types or agendas. It has no effect on me whatsoever and if you and anyone else want to do so, then go for it.

 

Once he is sworn in as POTUS, and does something that is not within keeping of the office, it is factual and not hearsay or innuendo, then I will be one of the first to criticise but neither what I or you have to say will ever have any bearing on his position.  You really should learn to live with it but it is obvious you can't.  And as you say, why would that be exactly?

 

   

 

"Where did I say or even intimate that I have a problem with him being scrutinised? "

 

HERE

 

"gee what will one come up with to discredit him even though we know what we are propagating would be false, just as is the rest of spin we're flogging about the President-Elect."

[OMGImInPattaya]

1 hour ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

No, there are not, anyone who stood can request a recount.

That is not the legal standard for seeking a recount in Michigan or Wisconsin...and I see Stein has already withdrawn her request for a statewide recount in Pennsylvania.

 

It was a good fund-raising stunt by Stein, however, that drew in allot of money from the low information SJW and lib-Dem crowds.

Edited December 4, 2016 by OMGImInPattaya

[smotherb]

16 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Political considerations obviously.

Please explain

[smotherb]

16 hours ago, Ulysses G. said:

 

Indeed. The recounts are a waste of time.

How is it a waste of time to verify our election integrity--Trump said they were rigged, now others are saying similar things; why not check and see?

[Foexie]

16 hours ago, smotherb said:

Wasn't it trump who said the elections were rigged long before 11/8? So, why is he now trying to stop the recount, especially if Hillary cannot win anyway?

 

Because he is a two faced moron.

 

If he lost the elections you could put all your money on it that he would demand a recount in all 50 states starting the day after the elections.

And crying out loud that that the elections were a big fraud and bla bla bla.

 

But now his opponent is doing this it is to expensive, not worth to do and more bla bla bla.

Edited December 4, 2016 by Foexie
wrong number

[smotherb]

Just now, Foexie said:

 

Because he is a two faced moron.

 

If he lost the elections you could put all your money on it that he would demand a recount in all 52 states starting the day after the elections.

And crying out loud that that the elections were a big fraud and bla bla bla.

 

But now his opponent is doing this it is to expensive, not worth to do and more bla bla bla.

All 52 states, huh?

[Foexie]

4 minutes ago, smotherb said:

All 52 states, huh?

yeah yeah i send it before i saw that it was 50. edited already.

 

Thanks for noticing it so quickly.

Edited December 4, 2016 by Foexie

[Shawn0000]

1 hour ago, OMGImInPattaya said:

That is not the legal standard for seeking a recount in Michigan or Wisconsin...and I see Stein has already withdrawn her request for a statewide recount in Pennsylvania.

 

It was a good fund-raising stunt by Stein, however, that drew in allot of money from the low information SJW and lib-Dem crowds.

 

Michigan has already rejected Trumps objection to the recount, why wouldn't any state?  After all, it is a democratic right!  Expect the same from Wisconsin.  And ask yourself just what it is that you fear from a recount, democracy being seen to be done?

 

And no, they are just going about it in a different way now with Pennsylvania.

"Make no mistake, the Stein campaign will continue to fight for a state-wide recount in Pennsylvania," recount campaign lawyer Jonathan Abady said today.

It would seem that it is you who is in the "low information" group.

 

As for it being a "fundraiser" for the Green Party. 

" If we raise more than what's needed, the surplus will also go toward election integrity efforts and to promote voting system reform."

Got a problem with integrity?

 

Edited December 4, 2016 by Shawn0000

[Jingthing]

Stein didn't get much support in the election, but she's part of the reason trump won. There is a false narrative being bandied about that it was the rust belt whites that gave trump the win. It's much more than that. Millenials just didn't vote in enough numbers, too many voted for Stein, stayed home, assumed Hillary Clinton would win. If they had voted for Hillary Clinton in the same levels as they did for Obama, we wouldn't be stuck with the horror real life reality t.v. show of a President trump. So fie on Stein! 

[Shawn0000]

10 minutes ago, Jingthing said:

Stein didn't get much support in the election, but she's part of the reason trump won. There is a false narrative being bandied about that it was the rust belt whites that gave trump the win. It's much more than that. Millenials just didn't vote in enough numbers, too many voted for Stein, stayed home, assumed Hillary Clinton would win. If they had voted for Hillary Clinton in the same levels as they did for Obama, we wouldn't be stuck with the horror real life reality t.v. show of a President trump. So fie on Stein! 

 

I don't think strategic voting is something to encourage, in fact it is one of the biggest problems with American politics.

[Si Thea01]

29 minutes ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

No, there are not, anyone who stood can request a recount.

 

Not quite 100 percent correct.  Maybe you should read this.   https://mic.com/articles/160446/how-does-a-us-election-recount-work-the-deadlines-history-and-rules-for-recounts#.RTjl0eHCw   

[Si Thea01]

2 hours ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

"Where did I say or even intimate that I have a problem with him being scrutinised? "

 

HERE

 

"gee what will one come up with to discredit him even though we know what we are propagating would be false, just as is the rest of spin we're flogging about the President-Elect."

 

 

Now Shaun, HERE you are doing exactly what you complain that others do. So please  DO NOT post part quotes, if it distorts or changes the meaning.  In case you don't understand, it is about Pence with a reference to the President Elect.  Why are you doing this?   We all know Shaun, so you don't have to answer for being caught out.

 

HERE it is in full

 

And replaced by Pence, gee what will one come up with to discredit him even though we know what we are propagating would be false, just as is the rest of spin we're flogging about the President-Elect. 

 

[Shawn0000]

7 minutes ago, Si Thea01 said:

 

 

Now Shaun, HERE you are doing exactly what you complain that others do. So please  DO NOT post part quotes, if it distorts or changes the meaning.  In case you don't understand, it is about Pence with a reference to the President Elect.  Why are you doing this?   We all know Shaun, so you don't have to answer for being caught out.

 

HERE it is in full

 

And replaced by Pence, gee what will one come up with to discredit him even though we know what we are propagating would be false, just as is the rest of spin we're flogging about the President-Elect. 

 

 

No, I posted it so that the relevant part was not out of context, the relevant part being,

"just as is the rest of spin we're flogging about the President-Elect."

The fact being that what is being said about Trump is not spin, it is hardly as if you need to spin anything to make Trump look bad, a quote will do fine!

 

[MikeLikesU]

1 hour ago, Foexie said:

 

Because he is a two faced moron.

 

If he lost the elections you could put all your money on it that he would demand a recount in all 50 states starting the day after the elections.

And crying out loud that that the elections were a big fraud and bla bla bla.

 

But now his opponent is doing this it is to expensive, not worth to do and more bla bla bla.

 

He never said that at all.  You did. 

Trump said he would wait and see ...  everything else was inferred.

 

Hillary's people ooohed and ahhhed...and said Trump was a bad boy for saying "Let's wait and See".

 

Democrats (backed by Hillary) went right for the recount, however...based on the wrong assumption that voting machines could be hacked.  They tried everything to defeat the system...didn't they?  

 

1. Democrats running amok in streets.

2. Democrats petitioning to change the age old system of electoral voting to popular voting.

3.  Democrats demanding recounts on ridiculous claims that non-networked voting machines were hacked.

 

Democrats running amok...

So, in light of all this....seems like the Democrats (Hillary) are the real two faced morons.

 

Big difference.

 

Edited December 4, 2016 by MikeLikesU

[Shawn0000]

11 minutes ago, MikeLikesU said:

 

He never said that at all.  You did. 

Trump said he would wait and see ...  everything else was inferred.

 

Hillary's people ooohed and ahhhed...and said Trump was a bad boy for saying "Let's wait and See".

 

Democrats (backed by Hillary) went right for the recount, however...based on the wrong assumption that voting machines could be hacked.  They tried everything to defeat the system...didn't they?  

 

1. Democrats running amok in streets.

2. Democrats petitioning to change the age old system of electoral voting to popular voting.

3.  Democrats demanding recounts on ridiculous claims that non-networked voting machines were hacked.

 

Democrats running amok...

So, in light of all this....seems like the Democrats (Hillary) are the real two faced morons.

 

Big difference.

 

 

The president of the Republican National Committee commented at the time on what Trump was implying when he said,

“All he’s saying is, ‘Look, I’m not going to forgo my right to a recount in a close election,’ ”

Sorry, who were you calling two faced morons?

[Jingthing]

Bull. trumps speeches were constantly saying the election was rigged for weeks before the election. That was outrageous. Now if trump sincerely wants to unify with the people that are horrified by his unpopular election he'll have to work hard at it. That's not looking like it's happening. Instead he's still holding partisan Mussolini style rallies with the rabid lock her up rabble. Unprecedented in American history.

[OMGImInPattaya]

2 hours ago, Shawn0000 said:

 

Michigan has already rejected Trumps objection to the recount, why wouldn't any state?  After all, it is a democratic right!  Expect the same from Wisconsin.  And ask yourself just what it is that you fear from a recount, democracy being seen to be done?

 

And no, they are just going about it in a different way now with Pennsylvania.

"Make no mistake, the Stein campaign will continue to fight for a state-wide recount in Pennsylvania," recount campaign lawyer Jonathan Abady said today.

It would seem that it is you who is in the "low information" group.

 

As for it being a "fundraiser" for the Green Party. 

" If we raise more than what's needed, the surplus will also go toward election integrity efforts and to promote voting system reform."

Got a problem with integrity?

 

It's not a "democratic right," just ask Al Gore  

 

The right to request a recount is governed by each state's election code...and there are certain prima facia requirements that have to be met, which Stein has failed to satisfy. There is also the Constitutional mischief to be avoided with spurious recount requests from candidates that have no reasonable chance of winning the vote in a state.

 

Like Sanders...with the extra money she raises, Stein will buy a new house